lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 1595
Report #1595 Skillset: Skill: Avenger Org: Cacophony Status: Completed Jan 2017 Furies' Decision: Solution 1 Problem: This report seeks to first address the issue of Avenger doing negligible damage that the average player could cure and subsequently tank (arguably indefinitely), and secondly address the issue of Avenger in enemy territory. Currently, if Player A attacks Player B in denizen territory that Player B is enemied to, such as the Illithoid Prisons or Kephera areas, Player B is not able to defend themselves unless they declare Player A. Essentially, Player A can grief Player B with no consequences, because if Player B fights back and kills Player A once, then Player A returns to attack them and Player B again retaliates, without even killing player A, Player A can enact vengeance upon them. While I acknowledge that yes, it is enemy territory, this can, and has, been abused. R: 0 Solution #1: Change Avenger to an instant kill. Not seeking to change the way the Avatar works, just that when the Avatar reaches the room with the person in it they are instantly killed. 6 R: 9 Solution #2: Change the way that Avenger is handled in enemy territory. Using the same designations as I did above, Player A should be free to attack Player B without restrictions if Player B is in enemy territory, including denizen areas. However, if Player A engages in combat with Player B, Avenger needs to no longer apply, in order to allow Player B some sort of recourse. However, if Player B attacks Player A first in territory that Player B is enemied to but not Player A, Avenger should still apply to Player B. Player Comments: ---on 1/8 @ 01:05 writes: I'm wary of changing Avenger mechanics (beyond changing it to be an instantkill, or just increasing its potency for the new meta). What kind of abuses specifically are we talking about, regarding avenger mechanics in denizen area enemy territory? If those can be explained and listed, I think this will go a long way to explaining why it needs to be changed beyond "it has been abused". ---on 1/8 @ 03:02 writes: Currently there is a situation where if a player is in enemy territory, and gets attacked, then kills their attacker, they get status. If they get attacked again by that same person and kill their attacker again, they can get avengered. This leads to situation where a person is unable to defend themselves and their only recourse is to run/avoid the area entirely. (I think this is actually fine for prime org territory, but not denizen territory.) ---on 1/8 @ 04:55 writes: Lerad, I will give you the exact situation that prompted this report. I was in Illithoid Prison hunting the illithoid. Malarious came out to the prison and attacked me. I am enemied to the prison, so I had to declare him to defend myself, he was allowed to attack me freely. He ran from the fight, I did not pursue him. I went back to bashing, he sent me some tells tells me to leave his influenceables alone. He attacked me again, I killed him this time after killing the illithoid I was bashing. He ressed and came back to fight me again, he was able to attack freely. I tried to declare, but even then I couldn't hit him back to defend myself. I had to PK CAREFUL OFF in order to hit him to defend myself. As soon as I hit him with suspect, I got a vengeance status. I killed him in a fair fight again, I got a 2nd vengeance status. Malarious then goes to the avenger, avengers me, and then I'm peaced for 7 hours for those 3 statuses, which I got by defending myself in enemy territory. That's not even really his area, he just defends it because he likes to influence it, and doesn't wan't me to bash it (some vague south defends illi/north defens keph here). Now, Malarious pretty much gets to hold the second vengeance over my head ("Stay out of my illithoid or I'll peace you again"), I can't even touch the area while he's around because I risk either getting vengeance again, or possibly dying to him without being able to defend myself at all (or get more avengers). Wait no, I have to be careful of -any- enemy area on prime now because of that, for a RL month. He also holds the ability to peace me for some hours whenever he wants? Don't want me in the next domoth fight? Peaced. Needs odds in your favor for this raid? Peaced. So, I think the ability to gank someone in a hunting area, and then peace them when you lose the fight is maybe, just a bit trollish, and abusable. If I'm going to be attacked while I'm hunting, it's a fight to the death for the most part (even though I didn't chase him when he ran fr ---on 1/8 @ 04:56 writes: From me the first time), so I shouldn't be punished if you initiate combat with me. Apologies, my comment was a cut off ---on 1/8 @ 05:34 writes: I'm against changing Avenger mechanics-- any changes always have unintended consequences. If you don't want to get Avengered, DO NOT TURN PK CAREFUL OFF. That is why the command exists. Only turn it off if you want to be Avengered. Making it instakill is fine, though. ---on 1/8 @ 06:25 writes: Opposed. I agree with Xenthos, the system even warned you about turning it off... ---on 1/8 @ 18:58 writes: While I agree that Avenger warns you for a reason, I don't feel that being able to relentlessly grief someone without recourse in a bashing zone is okay. While I wouldn't say that Anelissa's situation is really griefing, the design flaw exists and will inevitably be abused. ---on 1/8 @ 19:32 writes: I think there needs to be a separation between player org enemy territory and denizen enemy territory. The current rules are fine for player org enemy territory, for the fact that so many (especially higher end) Prime plane bashing areas come with enemy statuses that mean you become open PK means the effective pool of bashing areas, particularly for people who don't enjoy fighting, much smaller. The worst part is that it's not even that the area is open PK. It's that -you- are open PK and if you get attacked you can't even defend yourself without having to consider the Avenger rules. ---on 1/9 @ 01:31 writes: I believe that it might be best to exclude player controlled enemy territory. (Prime cities/villages) from this. ---on 1/12 @ 17:54 writes: I agree. The only place you should be open PK on Prime is places directly controlled by an enemy city: the city proper, and villages owned by that city. ---on 1/13 @ 04:10 writes: To specify sol 1: Avatar should kill you in one shot. Not changing the mechanic of Avatar existing, just buffing its damage. ---on 1/14 @ 18:23 writes: 1 only ---on 1/16 @ 21:05 writes: Failed ganks should penalize the ganker, not the victim. It doesn't make any sense to punish a victim for turning the tables on someone who initiates combat against them, in any area. ---on 1/17 @ 19:13 writes: In terms of solution 2, I think we need to approach this another way. This change would also mean you could not defend Sea of Despair as a mag, Inner sea as Celestian, Illithoid, Kephera, etc all become undefendable by virtue of being gankable if you try. I believe avenger causes declare on the other side to act as though you DEFENDed the mobs in the area ---on 1/17 @ 21:32 writes: I don't see how that would be the case. It would just allow those being attacked while in enemy territory to defend themselves. ---on 1/19 @ 17:32 writes: There are a lot of people voting to reject Solution 2 and I suspect there may be confusion on exactly what will change with it. The simple explanation is this: If a player is in (npc) enemy territory, they will be free to be attacked without declaring or other restrictions (as is currently the case), however they will also be able to strike back against their attacker without avenger (the proposed change). They will not be able to initiate an attack on anyone not enemied to the territory. ---on 1/20 @ 15:13 writes: Side note: Could we change avenger to declare mutual declares if the target and attacker are both enemied? This way you cannot be "defending", I do not know if it does that presently or if just first person is the declarer.